clownish clown wrote:
Certainly unmatched range in U.S. history, and remember that Webb was only 23 when he ran 27:34. Nobody has ever run that fast that young in U.S. history. Not even Rupp.
What about Chris Derrick?
clownish clown wrote:
Certainly unmatched range in U.S. history, and remember that Webb was only 23 when he ran 27:34. Nobody has ever run that fast that young in U.S. history. Not even Rupp.
What about Chris Derrick?
Hill Stomper wrote:
clownish clown wrote:Certainly unmatched range in U.S. history, and remember that Webb was only 23 when he ran 27:34. Nobody has ever run that fast that young in U.S. history. Not even Rupp.
What about Chris Derrick?
This has already been addressed. Read page one.
clownish clown wrote:
Certainly unmatched range in U.S. history, and remember that Webb was only 23 when he ran 27:34. Nobody has ever run that fast that young in U.S. history. Not even Rupp.
Hill Stomper wrote:
What about Chris Derrick?
clownish clown wrote:
This has already been addressed. Read page one.
And Alberto Salazar, who did it THREE TIMES as a 23 year old. But yeah, other than those two guys, you almost got it....
...EXCEPT YOU WERE WRONG ABOUT RUPP TOO, WHO RAN 27:33 AS A 20 YEAR OLD. Good work CLOWN.
Listen george oscar moron.
If you could read, you'd know that Rupp was already covered along with Derrick. Learn to read you ignorant piece of fecal matter.
As for Salazar, he turned 24 that year, but yeah, he was only 23, although he was an older 23 than Webb, so he doesn't count as having done it younger than Webb, you imbecile.
Either way, you are so stupid as to miss the point. The point is that Webb ran a great 10,000m at a young age. The 10,000m was the track event for Derrick, Rupp and Salazar. How stupid are you?
Wheating is the male version of Tiffany McWilliams (Dudley).
Don't make blatantly incorrect claims if you don't want to get called out by multiple people. You were wrong about Rupp. You forgot Derrick. You said Webb did it at 23 and claimed that "no one else did it that young" - if you had more than a tenuous grasp on comprehension, you'd know the "that" in your claim refers to "23", not "23 and x days". So, yes, Salazar did do it "that" (23) young. Three times. If you hadn't said Webb did it at 23, and had only said that no one ran faster than 27:34 at the age Webb had, then you would have been correct to exclude Salazar and would have only been wrong twice (Rupp and Derrick).
Alright, I'm done detracting from the thread now.
Actually, george moron, you should know that I was correct all along. No U.S. runner in history had run 27:34 as young as Webb was at the time he did it. That says it all.
Salazar was not as young, and yes, I will count months if I want to. Later on, Rupp and Derrick ran faster at a younger age, if only barely. This has already been covered on the thread, which is why your posts have been both superfluous and irritating.
clownish clown wrote:
Yeah, and the truth is that Wheating turns 26 in a couple months, so he is no longer a young runner. I know he started a bit late, but Wheating's best years may be behind him.
Nah, we can fix him up just like Mo. He's a late bloomer that's all.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dhMpqfIUOo0
Watch and learn little georgie. This was his debut at 10,000m, and he ran 27:34 at 23. Swallow that.
Wow, some good points in the thread. Anyways, to the people who are saying his career is "sporadic," here is how I'd respond:
1. "Sporadic" implies rare. Webb's brilliance wasn't rare at all, that's why I posted at least 12 brilliant accomplishments of his spread across several years and there are probably more. I've never heard someone say "he's just a 12-hit wonder..."
2. Webb had better years and worse years, like everyone. Someone pointed out that the consistency freaks like Rupp and Lagat are the exception. It's silly to expect good seasons PRs every year. Derrick didn't really beat his freshman year PR of 13:29 (matched it once) until his senior year and he's never been a poster child for "sporadic."
It's kind of funny people are even debating Webb's one 10K against some of the best 10k runners in US history... so Webb is worse than Galen Rupp at 10K? Is that really an insult?
'2007
-incredible victory at US Championships 1500 again, over eventual world champ Lagat'
Sums it up - winning US champs at 1500m esp. back then means f all in world terms. I know you think the world revolves around America but Webb did nothing in major championships
Of course he did a lot more than Weating but he didn't do much with what he had.
Some people just can't admit being wrong.
Woah. I just heard someone else say that, you said it perfectly.
ukathleticscoach. He was ranked #7 by T & F news in 2007. #1 ranked Daniel K. Komen didn't even make the final so clearly T & F news rankings are based on the entire season, not the World Finals, and they believed Webb was the 7th best guy that year.
He raced 2007 to win. He was up against a 3:26 runner, a 3:29 proven drug cheat, a future 3:27 runner, and yet there he was there with 100 to go, in a sprint finish where the top 8 were separated by less than 1 second. The 2012 field, when you consider which guys were actually healthy, was no match.
But you're right. He never took home a medal. They basically give those away and he should have simply taken it. What a choke artist.
ukathleticscoach wrote:
'2007
-incredible victory at US Championships 1500 again, over eventual world champ Lagat'
Sums it up - winning US champs at 1500m esp. back then means f all in world terms.
There are plenty of years for which I would agree that winning US champs means "f all in world terms", but beating the eventual world champ in your own national championship actually does mean something.
Furthermore, Webb was a legit contender going into 07 worlds. The win in Paris was genuinely impressive as was the 1:43.xx 800m. And that time trial 3:46.xx mile wasn't shabby either.
I have to admit I've always wondered if he didn't return some suspicious lab test at some point leading into 07 worlds that wasn't quite a positive but led someone to tell him he needed to back off whatever he was using, because he didn't look right at worlds and has never come close to his 07 form since.
Could, of course, simply have been a case of mistiming his peak in 07 itself, but that doesn't explain the subsequent inability to get close to that 07 level again.
Webb is one of the best US runners at any distance.
Now, I'll say this with him being one of my favorite runners to watch and as someone who followed his career since sophomore year in high school, he has been a quite sporadic.
I do hope he sees farah, lagat, and even bekele running well after 30 and keeps trying to regain his form. That would make me unbelievably happy.
idk about the clossest to a gold medal in 1500 and up.. id say rupps silver metal was little closer.. being one spot behind gold. but hey what do I know.
Hardloper wrote:
Leo was nowhere close to having a shot at winning.
Actually, he did win. You'll see.
Dear All Alan Webb fanbois
Go back and read the article. Take it into context. Realise that it was reported that Gregson is faring a little better than Wheating, not Webb.
Whilst I realise that Webb is the golden boy of this board and you have all owned him since he was a wee High Schooler breaking 4mins, you all need to get your hands off your wieners and look at it objectively. Webb - huge talent , no medals. Gregson/Wheating - likewise. Centro/Rupp/others - medals.
dkny64 wrote:
because he didn't look right at worlds and has never come close to his 07 form since.
Sure he did. What looked wrong with him?